memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:M-113 creature
FA Status Nomination M-113 creature: It's got everything and it makes for a good read. Tyrant 02:40, 1 Feb 2005 (CET)Tyrant * Supported. --BlueMars 22:18, Feb 2, 2005 (CET) * Supported. Ottens 19:46, 3 Feb 2005 (CET) * Supported. | THOR 05:14, 5 Feb 2005 (CET) Reconfirmation This one was originally featured in early 2005, and has seen several edits since then. I just copyedited it again today, some other contributors joined that attempt. While I'm not totally happy with small bits, like the name of the "Enterprise encounter" section or the wording of the remaining bgnote, I still think it's in a better shape than before. FA blurb has been created (Template:FA/M-113 creature), this diff shows the changes since first featuring the article. I'm not voting myself. -- Cid Highwind 13:19, December 5, 2011 (UTC) *I'm going to oppose for now, since as Cid mentioned it still needs some more work, that bgnote needs something done to it, and based on the amount of changes in the last few days we might want to go "full nomination" on this one. - 14:42, December 5, 2011 (UTC) *Changing to a tentative support after I removed the bgnote. It does look like another pair of eyes on this wouldn't be remiss though. - 21:49, December 7, 2011 (UTC) *'Support', looks up to specs to my (untrained) in-universe eye--Sennim 13:21, December 9, 2011 (UTC) *'Support' – I think the recent edits have been a good community effort, and I think the article is now up to modern FA standards.–Cleanse ( talk | ) 00:23, December 10, 2011 (UTC) :Comment: I personally think the in-universe info about the M-113 carcass in Trelane's mansion should be carefully moved from the bg info section to the "history" one. --Defiant 01:01, December 10, 2011 (UTC) *'Oppose', after extensively analyzing this article, I've come to the opinion that it's basically deeply flawed. The page, as it currently stands, seems unsure whether it's an article about the last individual specimen of a species or the entire species. It's also quite wordy, with too many repetitions of some points, and the individual sections are not separated enough for my liking (such as historical info appearing in the lead-in, rather than in the "historical" section, etc.) I'd also opt for the info in the historical section being arranged in a more historical/chronological order than it currently is. --Defiant 02:27, December 10, 2011 (UTC) :If you want to try and save it Defiant, make changes as you see fit, though the article is about both the individual creature and the species. - 22:02, December 19, 2011 (UTC) Check: Barnhart This article shows Barnhart being killed on the surface of M-113, and then again on Deck 9. : I removed the first reference, and kept the one of him having died on Deck 9, as the picture on his page clearly shows. --Gvsualan 03:42, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) Removed * An alternative, more scientific designation for this creature would be "salivore," from the Latin meaning "salt-eater." :Doesn't seem to be from the Star Fleet Medical Reference Manual or something like that that's at least semi-official, so removed as fan speculation. -- Capricorn 04:28, February 3, 2011 (UTC) ---- I just removed the following two bgnotes: The text was rewritten to make the first one unnecessary. The second one seems to be speculation - the creature was seen to absorb salt through its mouth, so that may as well have been the function of the mouth. -- Cid Highwind 11:41, December 5, 2011 (UTC) :I've removed this since despite the fact that there is some good material in there, it's mostly speculation and stating unknowns. - 21:44, December 7, 2011 (UTC) ::I've removed the following, regarding the surviving creature's view of Humans as food: "As there was no opportunity to question it, it is unclear if this attitude arose from desperation or if it was the natural outlook of the species." Firstly, we don't state what is unknown. Secondly, it seems pretty clear to me that the creature's hunger for Humans is due to desperation, owing to its need for salt. --Defiant (talk) 08:24, September 19, 2016 (UTC) Actress Well, first time using this particular feature of Memory Alpha. Who was the actor inside the suit? I have seen one picture today that suggested that it was Sharon Gimpel. I cannot find anyone with that name in the IMDB. Can someone give a good name? Thanks! Ray 02:02, January 18, 2015 (UTC) :She is under the name Sandra Lee Gimpel in IMDB http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0319831/ --Pseudohuman (talk) 02:55, January 18, 2015 (UTC) Two individuals As there are two examples of this creature - the one McCoy killed and the one Trelane has (dead) (unless he made a model of it, not the real thing, which is likely, so would it be illusory?), should it not have a "List of M-113 creatures" page? Make this the species page once and for all and have individuals elsewhere? --LauraCC (talk) 15:33, September 9, 2016 (UTC) :If it's a model, it may not even be illusory. -- sulfur (talk) 15:48, September 9, 2016 (UTC) True. But in that it doesn't exist as a once-live creature. --LauraCC (talk) 15:57, September 9, 2016 (UTC) Propose split Just watched The Man Trap again to mark Star Trek Day. I was looking at the articles on the M-113 creature and Nancy Crater. It seems to me that there is a lot of overlap when there should be three separate articles. Nancy Crater should only be about the human woman. M-113 creature could maybe be renamed something like ‘M-113 inhabitants’ and stick to discussing only the species. A potential third article would be ‘Nancy Crater (duplicate)’ and focus on the antics and fate of the M-113 creature. -- Connor Cabal (talk) 19:51, September 10, 2019 (UTC) :There's no need for the individual creature and the species to have separate articles. It's needlessly complicated in my opinion. --NetSpiker (talk) 05:43, September 13, 2019 (UTC) I think there is some precedent for a split in the articles Horta and Mother Horta. --Connor Cabal (talk) 20:37, October 3, 2019 (UTC) :: People and species are two different things. --Alan (talk) 04:54, November 21, 2019 (UTC) Not sure I understand what you mean. The M-113 creature and the Mother Horta are both sentient beings. The human Nancy Crater was also a sentient being (or, person). The M-113 inhabitants would be the species in question. We have separate articles for Keith Rocha, Maura, and the coalescent organism. -- Connor Cabal (talk) 02:36, November 24, 2019 (UTC) :: My comment wasn't directed at you. But you are correct. The page about Nancy Crater (the creature) could be the main article for the creature, as it was the primary appearance of the character (first and last, actually) and species specific stuff on this page. The fact also remains that there was the mount of a second M-113 creature seen in Trelane's study, making a second individual of the sort. --Alan (talk) 20:59, November 27, 2019 (UTC)